Induction treatment with rabbit antithymocyte globulin versus basiliximab in renal transplant recipients with planned early steroid withdrawal.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and efficacy of rabbit antithymocyte globulin (r-ATG) with basiliximab in renal transplant recipients for whom an early steroid withdrawal (ESW) regimen was planned. DESIGN: Single-center, retrospective, cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary care medical center, including inpatient hospital stays and outpatient nephrology clinics. PATIENTS: Ninety-nine consecutive adult recipients of living- or deceased-donor renal transplants between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2007, in whom ESW was planned and who received either r-ATG or basiliximab; patients receiving an extended-criteria kidney donation or a donation after cardiac death were excluded. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: All patients received mycophenolate mofetil and tacrolimus as maintenance therapy with planned ESW. Induction therapy was either r-ATG 1.5 mg/kg/day for 4 days (68 patients) or basiliximab 20 mg on postoperative days 0 and 4 (31 patients). The primary composite end point of biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR), graft loss, and death occurred in 6 patients (9%) and 9 patients (29%) in the r-ATG and basiliximab groups at 1 year after transplantation, respectively (p=0.01), with rates of 7% (5/68 patients) and 26% (8/31 patients) for BPAR (p=0.02), 0% and 3% (1/31 patients) for graft loss (p=0.31), and 2% (1/68 patients) and 0% for patient death (p>0.99). Average time to first BPAR was significantly longer in the r-ATG group (mean ± SD 151.4 ± 82.9 vs 53.6 ± 68.4 days, p<0.01). Kidney function at 12 months was similar between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Rabbit-ATG was associated with a lower frequency and delayed onset of BPAR compared with basiliximab in renal transplant recipients who received an ESW regimen.

Induction immunosuppressive therapies in renal transplantation.

PURPOSE: Induction immunosuppressive therapies for patients undergoing renal transplantation are reviewed. SUMMARY: The goal of induction therapy is to prevent acute rejection during the early posttransplantation period by providing a high degree of immunosuppression at the time of transplantation. Induction therapy is often considered essential to optimize outcomes, particularly in patients at high risk for poor short-term outcomes. All of the induction immunosuppressive agents currently used are biological agents and are either monoclonal (muromonab-CD3, daclizumab, basiliximab, alemtuzumab) or polyclonal (antithymocyte globulin [equine] or antithymocyte globulin [rabbit]) antibodies. Although antithymocyte globulin (rabbit) is not labeled for induction therapy, it is used for this purpose more than any other agent. Basiliximab is not considered as potent an immunosuppressive agent but has a much more favorable adverse-effect profile compared with antithymocyte globulin (rabbit) and is most commonly used in patients at low risk for acute rejection. Rituximab is being studied for use as induction therapy but to date has not demonstrated any significant benefits over placebo. While head-to-head data are available comparing most induction agents, the final decision on the most appropriate induction therapy for a transplant recipient is highly dependent on preexisting medical conditions, donor characteristics, and the maintenance immunosuppressive regimen to be used. CONCLUSION: No standard induction immunosuppressive regimen exists for patients undergoing renal transplantation. Antithymocyte globulin (rabbit) is the most commonly used agent, whereas basiliximab appears safer. The choice of regimen depends on the preferences of clinicians and institutions.